Riti Theory

 

INTRODUCTION

Ṛīṭi is a theory of language of literature. Though it is described for the first time in Bharat’s Ṇāṭyāṣāṣṭṛā  itself under the rubric of vṛṭṭī, It is Vāmana who developed it into a theory. Vāmana is considered to be the founder of ṛīti saṃpradāya .However, the concept of ṛīti was not completely new sidddāṅta in Indian poetics; it is Vāmana who developed rīti as a systematic school of poetics. Vāmana delves deep into the nature of poetry and considers rīti to be the soul of poetry. His famous dictum

 

 rītirātmā kāvyasya

(rīti is the soul of poetry)

 

is unequivocal assertion that, it is rīti that differentiates poetry from other forms of writing like philosophy or other sciences.

 

 WHAT IS ṚĪTI

Rīti means style or characteristic way of presentation adopted by the poet. For Vāmana, rīti means a particular arrangement of words and phrases (viśiṣṭapadaracanā). So rīti is a result of phrasal and verbal organization in a work of art .Other words used by other scholars are mārga, gati, pantha, and prasthāna. Earlier Daṇḍin had referred to two mārgas of representation: vaidarbhi and gaudiyā . Daṇḍin had said that each has a characteristic style. Vāmana added third one to it pancāli. Other scholars added more rītis to it. Rudraṭa added Latiya and Raja Bhoja added Avaṇtikā taking the total to five.  At the outset of  Kavyalamkarasutra (9th century A.D.) Vāmana defines rīti as,

 

 viśiṣṭapadaracanā

 (Arrangement of marked inflected constructions).

 

He goes on to differentiate between guṇas and alaṃkāras, classifies guṇas into śabda guṇas and artha guna and on the basis of the presence or absence of gunas classifies riti into vaidarbhi, gaudiyā and pancāli. Like Dandin, he accords the highest status to the vaidarbhi riti as it possesses all the excellences but also associates the gunas, ojāṣ and kāṇṭī with the gaudiyā riti and ṃāḍḥūṛyā and ṣūkūṃāṛāṭā with the pancāli riti. Thus while the gaudiyā is marked by the grand, the glorious and the imposing the pancāli is characterized by sweetness and softness.

 

Vāmana gives primacy to rīti over alaṃkāras. Guṇas are the qualities or poetic excellences which create beauty in poetry as against doṣas which are blemishes of poetry. So guṇas are an essential condition for poetry. Bharata and Daṇḍin both had enumerated ten guṇas. Vāmana retained the same ten guṇas but he created two sets of the same ten guṇas under two categories: śabda guṇas and artha guṇas. Thus, Vāmana has explained guṇas in terms of śabda (word) and artha (sense). For example, prasāda (lucidity) as a śabda guṇa gives lucidity so the text becomes easy to read and prasāda as an artha guṇa gives appropriateness of meaning

 

 

 

 

KUNTAK

Kūṇṭākā does not accept the classification as enumerated by Dāṇḍīṇ and Vāṃāṇā. He does not consider regional variations to be the basis of classification of literary modes of expression. Instead he identifies three ṃāṛgāṣ – ṣūkūṃāṛā, vīćīṭṛā and ṃāḍḥyāṃā - on the basis of what he terms kāvīṣvābḥāvā or the power, nature and the practice of the poet. The ṣūkūṃāṛā ṃāṛgā according to Kūṇṭākā, is marked by natural grace and charm, the vīćīṭṛā by decorativeness and the ṃāḍḥyāṃā by a combination of elements of both the styles.

 

MAMMATA

Ṃāṃṃāṭā  does not admit rīti as a separate element in poetic compositions. He discusses the concept of rīti under the rubric of vṛṭṭī. Ṃāṃṃāṭā gives the name of three vṛṭṭīs – upāṅāgāṛīkā, pāṛūṣā and koṃāḷā or gṛāṃyā – and says that these were referred to as vaidarbhi, gaudiyā and pancāli by earlier theorists. The upāṅāgāṛīkā is characterized by letters suggestive of the ṃāḍḥūṛyā guna, the pāṛūṣā by that of ojāṣ and the koṃāḷā by letters other than the above. But Ṃāṃṃāṭā makes it clear that mere arrangements of the letters can never impart poetic charm until and unless they help in the manifestation of ṛāṣā.

 

VISWANATHA

Viswanatha points out that ṛīṭī is just pāḍā ṣāṃgḥāṭāṇā, the formal arrangements of words and letters that help in the manifestation of ṛāṣā and can thus never claim to be the soul of poetry.

 

ANANDVARDHANA

Anandavardhana, the most important figure associated with this school, did not admit rīti as an important element of poetry but accepted another factor namely ṣāṃgḥāṭāṇā. He classifies

ṣāṃgḥāṭāṇā, into samāsa, madhyamā samāsa and dīrgha samāsa on the basis the presence

or absence of compounds.

 

 CONCLUSION

Vamana’s theory of rīti  lost relevance because it conceived poetic compositions only from the formal point of view without referring to its inner nature. But it improves upon the doctrines of the Alamkara school in giving primacy to the gunās over the alāmkārās as defining features of poetic compositions. The theory of rīti, despite its limitations, has been a major contribution to the study of literary compositions. This theory of language has close affinities with modern day stylistic studies of literature.